561© 2017 by the Serbian Biological Society How to cite this article: Charousová I, Medo J, Javoreková S. Isolation, antimicrobial activity of myxobacterial crude extracts and identification of the most potent strains. Arch Biol Sci. 2017;69(3):561-8.

Arch Biol Sci. 2017;69(3):561-568 https://doi.org/10.2298/ABS161011132C

Isolation, antimicrobial activity of myxobacterial crude extracts and identification of the most potent strains

Ivana Charousová*, Juraj Medo and Soňa Javoreková

Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Biotechnology and Food Sciences, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, Tr. A. Hlinku 2, 949 76 Nitra, Slovakia

*Corresponding author: ivanacharousova@gmail.com

Received: October 11, 2016; Revised: November 14, 2016; Accepted: November 18, 2016; Published online: December 14, 2016

Abstract: Broad spectrum antimicrobial agents are urgently needed to fight frequently occurring multidrug-resistant pathogens. Myxobacteria have been regarded as “microbe factories” for active secondary metabolites, and therefore, this study was performed to isolate two bacteriolytic genera of myxobacteria, Myxococcus sp. and Corallococcus sp., from 10 soil/sand samples using two conventional methods followed by purification with the aim of determining the antimicrobial activity of methanol extracts against 11 test microorganisms (four Gram-positive, four Gram-negative, two yeasts and one fungus). Out of thirty-nine directly observed strains, 23 were purified and analyzed for antimicrobial activities. Based on the broth microdilution method, a total of 19 crude extracts showed antimicrobial activity. The range of inhibited wells was more important in the case of anti-Gram-positive-bacterial activity in comparison with the anti-Gram-negative-bacterial and antifungal activity. In light of the established degree and range of antimicrobial activity, two of the most active isolates (BNEM1 and SFEC2) were selected for further characterization. Morphological parameters and a sequence similarity search by BLAST revealed that they showed 99% sequence similarity to Myxococcus xanthus − BNEM1 (accession no. KX669224) and Corallococcus coralloides – SFEC2 (accession no. KX669225). As these isolates had antimicrobial activity, they could be considered for use in the development of antibiotics for pharmaceutical use.

Key words: Myxococcus sp., Corallococcus sp.; antimicrobial activity; multidrug-resistant organisms

INTRODUCTION

Myxobacteria are flexible rod-shaped Gram-negative bacteria [1], which can perform cooperative feeding, and development into fruiting bodies [2]. They are characterized by an unusual way of life, as they move by gliding or creeping on surfaces and synthesize a large number of biologically active secondary metabo-lites (more than 80 basic structures with nearly 350 structural variants) [3,4]. The chemical structures of the myxobacteria metabolome are rare both in diver-sity and biological activities [4,5], because their sec-ondary metabolites are unusual hybrids of polyketides and nonribosomal made peptides which possess high pharmacological importance. Unlike metabolites from other microorganisms, myxobacterial metabolites are not glycosylated [6,7,8]. Members of the Deltapro-teobacteria, order Myxococcales, are well-known for their ability to produce secondary metabolites with

the capability to exert different biological effects [9]. Within the order Myxococcales, the genera Myxococcus and Corallococcus are very interesting. They are typi-cally found in topsoil where they grow as saprophytes by decomposing degradable polymers or as preda-tors by preying on other microorganisms [10]. They are distinguished from other Deltaproteobacteria by three traits: they are strictly aerobic, during starvation they form multicellular fruiting bodies [10] and most members of the Myxococcales have large genomes of around 10 Mb [11,12].

Therefore, the present study focused on the isola-tion and purification of Myxococcus sp. and Coralloco-ccus sp. from soil/sandy samples, examination of their biological activity against 11 test microorganisms and identification of the most active strains using morpho-logical, physiological and molecular methods.

562 Arch Biol Sci. 2017;69(3):561-568

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Soil collection

Soil samples were collected about 10-15 cm below the soil or sandy surface from Bahamas, Nassau (25°02’12.92” N; 77°22’27.63” W), Florida, Hollywood Beach (26°00’32.29” N; 80°06’55.89” W), Massachu-setts, Sandisfield (42°06’41.90” N; 73°08’36.62” W), Mexico, Mexico city (19°26’09.26” N; 99°08’37.03” W), Argentine, Iguazu (25°41’30.35” S; 54°26’11.45” W), Argentine, Buenos Aires (34°36’33.32”S; 58°21’22.35” W), Bolivia, Santa Cruz (17°49’11.74” S; 64°09P12.45” W), Florida, Miami (25°45’30.87”N; 80°11’45.36” W), British Columbia, Vancouver (49°18’18.80”N; 123°08’41.31” W), East-central Cana-da, Ontario (53°03’40.73” N; 93°19’15.28” W) in 2014 and 2015. Samples were air-dried for 2-5 days at room temperature, crushed and sieved. The sieved samples were then used for direct isolation of myxobacteria.

Isolation and purification procedure

For isolation of Myxococcus sp. and Corallococcus sp. two conventional isolation methods were used: baiting with living Escherichia coli streaks [13], and STAN21 agar [10] with slices of filter paper on the top. Living E. coli was cross-streaked on the surface of WY (water) medium [10] supplemented with 50 mg/mL of cycloheximide, 50 mg/mL of levamisole and 10 mg/mL of soraphen A for growth inhibition of other organisms. The central parts of the cross were inoculated with a pea-sized aliquot of the dry soils. Pea-sized clumps of soil were inoculated onto What-man #1 filter paper (Brentford, UK) placed on the surface of STAN21 medium with the addition of 1 mL of 500-fold diluted vitamin solution [14], cyclohex-imide (50 mg/mL) and levamisole (50 mg/mL). Plates were incubated at 30°C for 4-12 days. Recognition of myxobacteria by the morphology of fruiting bodies was performed using an Olympus stereomicroscope (SZX-10, Japan). Using a sterile needle, colonies look-ing like Myxococcus sp. and Corallococcus sp. were transferred to new WY plates with E. coli and purified several times. Finally, pure isolates were transferred to CY (casitone-yeast) medium [13] and to 20 mL of liquid CY/H medium [15], which were used for the preparation of glycerol stocks (0.5 mL of culture + 1.0

mL of glycerol, 50% v/v) conserved at -80°C in the Helmholtz Center for Infection Research, Microbial Strain Collection Group, Braunschweig, Germany.

Morphological identification of pure strains

Growth and morphology of strains were observed by stereomicroscope. According to criteria given in “The Prokaryotes” [13] and “Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bacteriology” [16], the taxonomy of all pure isolates was determined by observation of vegetative cells, fruiting bodies, myxospores and swarms.

Test strains

The organisms used in this study included four Gram-positive (Bacillus subtilis (DSM 10), Micrococcus luteus (DSM1790), Staphylococcus aureus (Newman), Myco-bacterium smegmatis (ATCC 700084)), four Gram-negative (Escherichia coli (DSM 1116), Escherichia coli (TolC), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA14), Chromobac-terium violaceum (DSM 30191)), yeasts Candida al-bicans (DSM 1665) and Pichia anomala (DSM 6766) and the filamentous fungus Mucor hiemalis (DSM 2656). Test microorganisms were obtained from DSM (German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cul-tures), Braunschweig, Germany and ATCC (American Type Culture Collection), Manassas, VA 20110, USA.

Crude extract preparation

The purified isolates were cultivated in 100 mL of P (peptone) medium [10], with 1-2 % Amberlite XAD (XAD-16 adsorbent resin) (Sigma-Aldrich, USA) and incubated for 5-7 days at 30°C. At the end of the fermentation, the XAD-16 absorber resin was separated by sieving, extracted with acetone for 1 h under the flue and separated with filter paper to bot-tom flasks. At 40°C the acetone was evaporated in a rotary evaporator (Heidolph, Germany). Finally, the dried precipitate was dissolved in 1 mL of methanol (Sigma-Aldrich, USA), resulting in raw extracts of 1:100 concentration.

563Arch Biol Sci. 2017;69(3):561-568

Broth microdilution detection of antimicrobial activity

The antimicrobial activity was screened by the broth microdilution method according to [17] in 96-well mi-croplates (BRAND, Germany). Indicator microorgan-isms were prepared by dilution with Mueller-Hinton broth (Merck, Germany) of 4-6-h-old cultures of bacte-ria to obtain 0.05 McFarland turbidity, and with Mycosel broth [18] of 4-6-h-old cultures of yeasts and a 48-h-old culture of fungus to obtain 0.01 McFarland turbidity. The dilution stages of crude extracts were determined by inhibited wells (A-H). As more wells with inoculated test microorganisms were inhibited with increasing activity of the tested raw extract. For example, inhibition till well G is twofold higher than till well E.

Characterization of the most active isolates

DNA isolation, PCR reaction, sequencing and phylogenetic analysis

The genomic DNA was extracted using a Spin Plant Mini Kit (Invisorb, Germany) and amplified by PCR using primers F27 and R1525 [19]. Reaction mix-tures were made in a total volume of 50 μL (25.0 µL of JumpStar Ready Mix (SigmaAldrich, Germany), 1 μL of each primer, 22 μL of PCR water and 1μL of tem-plate DNA). The PCR reaction ran in a Mastercycler Gradient (Eppendorf, Germany) under the following conditions: initial denaturation at 95°C for 5 min, 35 cycles of denaturation at 94°C for 30 s, annealing at 52°C for 30 s, and elongation at 72°C for 120 s, with a final extension at 72°C for 10 min. The purified PCR products (NucleoSpin® Gel and PCR Clean-up-Kit (Macherey-Nagel, Germany) were sequenced in the research group Genomic Analytics of the Helmholtz Center for Infection Research (HZI), Braunschweig (Germany) using primers F27 and R518. The ob-tained 16Sr RNA gene sequences were checked for quality using BioEdit alignment. The similarity of the 16S rRNA gene sequences was compared with available sequences deposited in the NCBI database using BLAST search (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/BLAST). A phylogenetic tree was constructed with the maximum likelihood method [20] using PhyML [21], with bootstrap values based on 100 replications.

Physiological and biochemical characterization

Three approaches were used for physiological test-ing. Determination of optimal temperature (20, 30, 37 and 42°C), pH tolerance (levels of 5-8) and the spectrum of resistance (ampicillin 100 µg/mL, gen-tamycin 50 µg/mL, hygromycin 150 µg/mL, chloram-phenicol 30 µg/mL, polymyxin 50 µg/mL, kanamycin 50 µg/mL, spectinomycin 50 µg/mL, cephalosporin 100 µg/mL, bacitracin 50 µg/mL, fusidic acid 50 µg/mL, oxytetracycline 10 µg/mL, thiostrepton 50 µg/mL and trimethoprim 50 µg/mL) was observed on VY/2 (baker´s yeast) medium [10]. From the outer fringes of the swarm, agar pieces were cut off and put on the agar plates for 5-7 days at 30°C.

Biochemical characteristics were established us-ing the commercially available test kit ApiZym® (bi-oMérieux, France). The API ZYM system consists of a plastic gallery of cupules; at the bottom of each is a fabric support carrying the substrates, which de-tect 19 enzymes. The isolates to be tested were grown in liquid CY/H medium. API strips were inoculated following the manufacturer’s instructions. The strips were incubated for 5 h at 30°C. After incubation, rea-gents were added to the cupules. After 5-10 min, we evaluated the strips according to manual criteria.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Myxobacteria are one of the pivotal antibiotic pro-ducers that contribute to the production of bioactive compounds with an unusual mode of action. Despite the importance of myxobacteria, the screening of myxobacteria is not high, due to a shortage in trained microbiologists and difficulties in the process of iso-lation, purification and maintenance. The microor-ganisms studied in this research corresponded to the general description of the order Myxococcales accord-ing to [22]. They produced long, thin motile rods on agar plates, moving by creeping motion. The use of two isolation methods followed by the 3-4 purifica-tion steps on the 10 soil samples provided a total of 24 pure strains of 40 directly observed on the isolation agar plates. Both used methods were suitable for the isolation of the bacteriolytic genera Myxococcus and Corallococcus, but in case of STAN21 medium with

564 Arch Biol Sci. 2017;69(3):561-568

filtrate paper on the top, we recorded more myxo-bacterial strains (Table 1). E. coli baiting were a more effective method for the isolation of Corallococcus sp. as opposed to STAN21 medium, where we observed similar amounts of both studied genera. Direct pick-ing of fruiting bodies or agar pieces made from the fringes of swarms transferred to new agar plates with inoculated E. coli worked very well as a purification procedure. Similar results were reported in [23], where the majority of pure cultures from soils was obtained by the baiting procedure with a dung pellet and with E. coli streaks.

Taxonomic identification of the Myxococcus and Corallococcus genera was performed by the keys pro-vided by [13] and [24]. The Myxococcus genus was characterized by short thin or fat rods clustered in separated large and globular fruiting bodies on a stalk. The color of swarms varied from light yellowish or-ange when young to bright orange when mature. The cell shape of Corallococcus species were thin long rods with cigar shape that built fruiting bodies with a coral-loid shape and orange, brown or pale brown color. In general, the observed older cultures of myxobacteria tended to become shorter and thicker.

Biological screening against test microorganisms

All pure strains dispersed easily in liquid P-medium with the addition of XAD. A quick switch to dispersed growth was obtained from all the strains by transfer-ring 1 mL of myxobacterial culture in liquid CY/H medium before fermentation. Twenty-four crude ex-tracts prepared from the fermentation were tested for growth inhibition against the test microorganisms, which included four Gram-positive, four Gram-neg-ative, two yeasts and one fungus. Table 2 gives the antimicrobial potential of myxobacteria against each target microorganism. No growth of the test organ-isms in wells after 24-48 h indicated an antimicrobial activity of the isolates.

In the present study, the antimicrobial activity of myxobacterial isolates was varied. Nineteen myxo-bacteria of 24 pure strains were active: 19 produced inhibitory secondary metabolites against all Gram-positives, 14 against Gram-negative bacteria and 13 showed antifungal activities. Very high activities were detected against the Gram-positive bacteria Bacillus subtilis, Micrococcus luteus and Staphylococcus aureus, and middle activity against Mycobacterium smegmatis, Chromobacterium violaceum, Escherichia coli (TolC)

Table 1. Distribution of Myxococcus sp. and Corallococcus sp. according to isolation method and origin.

Geographical origin Isolation source Method of isolation Number of isolates/genera

Labelling of pure strains in internal database

Bahamas, Nassau soil with sandy E. coli baitingFilter paper

1M, 1C-M, 2C

BNEM1, BNEC1BNFC1

Florida, Hollywood beach sandy E. coli baitingFilter paper

-M, -C-M, -C

--

Massachusetts, Sandisfield soil E. coli baitingFilter paper

2 M, 4C3M, 2C

SFEM1,2; SFEC1,2SFFM1, SFFC1

Mexico, Mexico City soil E. coli baitingFilter paper

1M, 1C4M, 4C

MXEC1MXFM1,2;MXFC1

Argentina, Iguazu soil E. coli baitingFilter paper

-M, -C-M, -C

--

Argentina, Buenos Aires soil E. coli baitingFilter paper

-M, 1C-M, 2C

BAEC1BAFC1,2

Bolivia, Santa Cruz soil E. coli baitingFilter paper

1M, 2C3M, -C

SCEM1, SCEC1SCFM1,2

Florida, Miami soil with sandy E. coli baitingFilter paper

-M, 1C1M, -C

-MIFM1

British Columbia, Vancouver soil E. coli baitingFilter paper

-M, 2C1M, -C

VREC1VEFM1

East-central Canada, Ontario soil E. coli baitingFilter paper

-M, -C-M, 1C

-ORFC1

M – Myxococcus; C – Corallococcus

565Arch Biol Sci. 2017;69(3):561-568

and fungal pathogens. Very low activities were record-ed in the case of the Gram-negatives Escherichia coli (DSM1665) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

There has been little mention of the antimicrobial activity of myxobacteria to date, but study of [23] re-ported that 62 tested myxobacterial isolates showed antifungal activities and inhibition potential against Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis. The majority of active strains belonged to the Myxococcus genus, which was indeed the most frequently isolated. Fos-ter et al. [25] reported that out of 64 strains, 77% in-hibited growth of Micrococcus luteus and 23% shown antifungal activities. Norén and Raper [26] found that the tested myxobacteria were able to produce antibacterial agents that, however, were active only in Gram-positive eubacteria, the Gram-negative species being unaffected by the agents. Micrococcus sp. and Staphylococcus sp. were the most susceptible. The dif-ferent inhibition pattern between Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria is caused by the component differences of the cell wall morphology [27]. Among the underexplored bacterial taxa, myxobacteria cer-tainly deserve the attention [9]. In recent years, myxo-bacteria have matched fungi, actinomycetes as well as some species of the genus Bacillus as top producers of microbial metabolites [28,29].

Considering these results, it could be seen that two of the investigated strains, Myxococcus sp. BNEM1 and Corallococcus sp. SFEC2, exhibited higher activity against pathogenic bacteria and fungi. The antimicro-

Table 2. Distribution of antimicrobial activity of Myxococcus and Corallococcus taxonomic groups.

StrainPanel of tested microorganisms

/range of inhibited wellsB.s. Ch.v. E.c.1 E.c.2 M.l. Ps.a. M.s. S.a. M.h. P.a. C.a.

Myxococcus sp.BNEM1 D C - C F A C H A A ASFEM1 F A - B E A D H A - -SFEM2 B C A B - A - - - - -SFFM1 C B A B C A C D - - -MXFM1 H - - - G - C H C - -MXFM2 H - - - G - C H D D BSCEM1 - - - - - - - - - - -SCFM1 G B A D E - B C D E CSCFM2 F A A C E A D H A C BMIFM1 G - - - E - C H B C AVEFM1 - - - - - - - - - - -Corallococcus sp.BNEC1 H - - D H - C H C A ABNFC1 H - - C H - D H B A ASFEC1 G - - C F - B F - - -SFEC2 H C A D F A D G A C CSFFC1 - - - - - - - - - - -MXEC1 - - - - - - - - - - -MXFC1 - - - - - - - - - - -BAEC1 D C A C C - C C A A ABAFC1 E B - A F - D H - B BBAFC2 D A - A D - C D - A -SCEC1 C D - C - B - - - - -VREC1 G - - - F - G - - - -ORFC1 C - - - D - C - - - -

B.s. − Bacillus subtilis; Ch.v. − Chromobacterium violaceum; E.c. 1 − Escherichia coli DSM1665; E.c.2 − Escherichia coli TolC; M.l. − Micro-coccus luteus; Ps.a. − Pseudomonas aeruginosa; M.s. − Mycobacterium smegmatis; S.a. − Staphylococcus aureus; M.h. − Mucor hiemalis; P.a. − Pichia anomala; C.a. − Candida albicans

Table 3. Enzymatic activity and resistance to various antibiotics of isolates BNEM1 and SFEC2.No. Enzyme BNEM1 SFEC2 Antibiotic BNEM1 SFEC223456789

101112

13-20

Phosphatase alkalineEsterase (C4)Esterase lipase (C8)Lipase (C14)Leucine arylamidaseValine arylamidaseCystine arylamidaseTrypsinChymotrypsinPhosphatase acidNaphthol-AS-BI-phosphohydrolaseGal, Gal, Gluc, Glu, Glu, N-ac-glu, man, fuco

51355411252

0

41445502052

0

AmpicillinGentamycinHygromycinChloramphenicolPolymyxinKanamycinSpectinomycinCephalosporineBacitracinFusidic acidOxytetracyclineThiostreptonTrimethoprim

-++-+-+++----

+++-++-+++---

For API ZYM: Gal – galactosidase, Gluc – glucuronidase, Glu – glucosidase, N-ac-glu – N-acetyl-glucose amidase, Man – mannosidase, Fuco – fucosidase; 5 − >40 nmol, 4 – 20 nmol, 3 – 10 nmol, 2 − 5 nmol, 1 − 2.5 nmol, 0 – no enzymatic activity. For reactions to antibiotics: + (positive) − visible growth indicates resistance, - (negative) − inhibition of growth indicates sensitivity

566 Arch Biol Sci. 2017;69(3):561-568

bial activity of the strains is probably due to the pres-ence of an antimicrobial complex of antibiotics. These strains have been found to produce several secondary metabolites. The molecular basis of synthesis for these compounds has been studied in some details (Table 4).

Characterization of the most potent Myxococcus and Corallococcus strains, BNEM1 and SFEC2

Two of the most active isolates were identified on the basis of morphological and physiological approaches and 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Morphological iden-tification was confirmed by microscopic and macro-scopic examination. The strain BNEM1 was a Gram-negative rod with slender vegetative cells, spherical myxospores and yellow fruiting bodies. The swarm colony was unpigmented or lightly yellow. Observed structures led to the identification of Myxococcus xanthus. The strain SFEC2 was Gram-negative with slender vegetative cells, orange and brown fruiting bodies forming ridges, and spherical myxospores were bizarrely coralloid. Based on these features, this strain was identified as Corallococcus coralloides. Fruiting bodies and swarms of these strains are shown in Fig. 1. Myxobacteria taxonomy was earlier associated only with morphology, which is adequate in differentiating between genera [30]. Nowadays, the identification of

myxobacteria up to the species level is commonly de-rived from 16S rRNA gene analysis. The PCR reaction of the 16S rRNA gene sequence from the tested strains showed excellent congruence between morphological characteristics and 16S rRNA data.

The 16S rRNA genes were compared by BLAST analysis, together with the morphology of structures typical for myxobacteria, in order to identify the tested isolates. A phylogenetic analysis at the species level is shown in Fig. 2. A phylogenetic comparison of evaluated sequences with available sequences in the NCBI BLAST tool confirmed phylogenetic position with morphology identification. Both isolates were identified to the species level; isolate BNEM1 had 99% similarity with Myxococcus xanthus and isolate SFEC2 with Corallococcus coralloides. Sequences were deposited in GenBank under the accession numbers KX669224 for BNEM1 and KX669225 for SFEC2.

Test strips that determine enzyme reactions, namely API ZYM, resulted in the enzyme patterns for Corallococcus and Myxococcus strains. However, ac-cording to [31], the features offered by these strips are not helpful in distinguishing members of the genera Myxococcus and Corallococcus, because Myxococcus strains displayed the same reactions as are described for Corallococcus species. Our results confirmed this observation. The reactions on the API ZYM strips by tested strains were reasonably similar to the reac-tions given by [32] for the genus Corallococcus and

Table 4. The secondary metabolites from Myxococcus xanthus and Corallococcus coralloides, which have already been identified and characterized.Antibiotic Class Effect Reference

Myxococcus xanthusmyxoprincomide linear peptide antifungal [33]

myxalamids polyketide-peptide hybrid antibacterial [34]

myxochromid cyclic peptide antibacterial [35]

myxovirescin macrocyclic antibiotic antibacterial [36]

myxochelin catechol siderophore antibacterial [37]

cittalin macrocyclic peptide no detected [38]

saframycin tetrahydroiso-quinoline

antitumor drug [39]

althiomycin peptide antibacterial [40]Corallococcus coralloides

corallorazine dipeptide antibacterial [41] corallopyronin polyketide antibacterial [42]

Fig. 1. Fruiting bodies and swarms of Corallococcus coralloides SFEC2 on (A) WY medium with E. coli streaks and on (B) CY medium, and Myxococcus xanthus BNEM1 on (C) WY medium and (D) CY medium.

567Arch Biol Sci. 2017;69(3):561-568

Myxococcus, which suggest a close relationship. Both strains showed similar enzymatic activities; highly positive reactions were confirmed for alkaline phos-phatase, esterase-lipase, lipase, leucine arylamidase, valine arylamidase, and phosphatase acid (Table 3). Results from morphological and molecular methods strengthened their position in the Myxococcales order.

Antibiotic resistance was tested against 13 antibi-otics. Strain BNEM1 was resistant to gentamycin, hy-gromycin, polymyxin, spectinomycin, cephalosporine, and bacitracin; strain SFEC2 was found to be resistant to ampicillin, gentamycin, hygromycin, polymyxin, kanamycin, cephalosporine, and bacitracin. Some growth was determined on medium with the addition of fusidic acid. The results of growth of Myxococcus xanthus and Corallococcus coralloides in the presence of various antibiotics was similar to [32]. The growth response of the BNEM1 and SFEC2 strains to differ-ent temperatures was tested at 20, 30, 37 and 42°C on VY/2 agar. The optimum growth temperatures for strains were near 30°C, like most myxobacteria, and

neither strain could grow at 37 and 42°C. The pH optimum was seen at pH 6.0-7.0.

The present findings highlight the significance of myxobacterial strains as potential sources of a broad spectrum of antimicrobial agents. These findings have important implications for the discovery of potent an-tibiotics from myxobacteria.

Acknowledgments: The author is grateful to the Helmholtz Cent-er for Infection Research (Microbial Strain Collection Group), Braunschweig, Germany for the scholarship and supporting of the results and to European Community project no. 26220220180: Building Research Center Agrobiotech. Special thanks to Dr. Kath-rin I. Mohr for the valuable help in working with myxobacteria and for excellent advice and discussions.

REFERENCES

1. Kaiser D. Signalling in myxobacteria. Annu Rev Microbiol. 2004;58:75-98.

2. Reichenbach H. Myxobacteria producers of novel bioactive substances. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2001;27:1057-98.

3. Berleman JE, Kirby JR. Deciphering the hunting strategy of a bacterial wolfpack. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2009;33:942-57.

4. Weissman, K.J., Müller, R.A. Brief tour of myxobacterial sec-ondary metabolism. Bioorg Med Chem. 2009;17:2121-36.

5. Bon RS, Waldmann H. Bioactivity-guided navigation of chemical space. Acc Chem Res. 2010;43:1103-14.

6. Bode HB, Müller R. Analysis of myxobacterial secondary metabolism goes molecular. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol. 2006;33:577-88.

7. Silakowski B, Kunze B, Müller R. Multiple hybrid polyketide synthase/non-ribosomal peptide synthetase gene clus-ters in the myxobacterium Stigmatella aurantiaca. Gene. 2001;275:233-40.

8. Kaur G, Hollingshead H. Biological evaluation of tubulysin A: a potential anticancer and antiangiogenic natural product. Biochem J. 2006;396:235-42.

9. Wenzel SC, Müller R. Myxobacteria – ‘microbial factories’ for the production of bioactive secondary metabolites. Mol Biosyst. 2009;5:567-74.

10. Shimkets L, Dworkin M, Reichenbach H. The myxobacteria. In: Dwotkin M, Falkow S, Rosenberg E, editors. The pro-karyotes. New York: Springer; 2006. p. 31-115.

11. Wu D, Hugenholtz P, Mavromatis K, Pukall R, Dalin E, Iva-nova NN, Kunin V, Goodwin L, Wu M, Tindall BJ, Hooper SD, Pati A, Lykidis A, Spring S, Anderson LJ, D´haeseleer P, Zemla A, Singer M, Lapidus A, Nolan M, Copeland A, Han C, Chen F, Cheng JF, Lucas S, Kerfeld Ch, Lang E, Gronow S, Chain P, Bruce D, Rubin EM, Kyrpides NC, Klenk HP, Eisen JA. A phylogeny-driven genomic encyclopaedia of bacteria and archaea. Nature. 2009;462:1056-60.

12. Ivanova N, Daum Ch, Lang E, Birte Abt, Kopitz M, Saunders E, Lapidus A, Lucas S, Glavina Del Rio T, Nolan M, Tice

Fig. 2. Phylogenetic tree of two the most active strains based on 16S rRNA gene sequences.

568 Arch Biol Sci. 2017;69(3):561-568

H, Copeland A, Cheng JF, Chen F, Bruce D, Goodwin L, Pitluck S, Mavromatis K, Pati A, Mikhailova N, Chen A, Palaniappan K, Land M, Hauser L, Chang YJ, Jeffries CD, Detter JC, Brettin T, Rohde M, Goker M, Bristow J, Mar-kowitz V, Eisen JA, Hugenholtz P, Kyrpides NC, Klenk HP. Complete genome sequence of Haliangium ochraceum type strain (SMP2T). Stand Genomic Sci. 2010;2:96-106.

13. Reichenbach H, Dworkin M. The myxobacteria. In: Balows A, Truper HG, Dworkin M, Harder KH, editors. The pro-karyotes. New York: Springer; 1992. p. 3417-87.

14. Schlegel HG. Allgemeine Mikrobiologie. 7 th ed. Stuttgart: Thieme Verlag; 1992. 634 p.

15. Mohr KI, Stechling M, Wink J, Wilharm E, Stadler M. Com-parison of myxobacterial diversity and evaluation of isola-tion success in two niches: Kiritimati Island and German compost. Microbiol open. 2015;5:268-78.

16. Reichenbach H. Genus II. Corallococcus gen. nov. (Chon-drococcus Jahn 1924, 85). In: Brenner DJ, Krieg NR, Staley JT, Garrity GM, editors. Bergey’s Manual of Systematic Bac-teriology. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 1079-82.

17. Wiegand I, Hilpert K, Hancock RE. Agar and broth dilution methods to determine the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of antimicrobial substances. Nat Protoc. 2008;3:163-75.

18. Cazin J, Wiemer DF, Howard JJ. Isolation. Growth charac-teristics, and long term storage of fungi cultivated by attine ants. App Environ Microbiol. 1989;55:1346-50.

19. Lane DJ. 16S/23S rRNA sequencing. In: Stackebrandt E, Goodfellow M, editors. Nucleic Acid Techniques in Bacte-rial Systematics. UK: Wiley; 1981. p. 115-76.

20. Felsenstein J. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol. 1981;17:368-76.

21. Guindon S, Gascuel AA. A simple, fast and accurate algo-rithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum likelihood. Syst Biol. 2003;52:696-704.

22. Declercq AM, Haesebrouck F, den Broeck WV, Boss-ier P, Decostere A. Columnaris disease in fish: a review with emphasis on bacterium-host interactions. Vet Res. 2013;44:27.

23. Gaspari F, Paitan Y, Mainini M, Losi D, Ron EZ, Marinelli F. Myxobacteria isolated in Israel as potential source of new anti-infectives. J Appl Microbiol. 2005;98:429-39.

24. Dawid W. Biology and global distribution of myxobacteria in soils. FEMS Microbiol Rev. 2000;24:403-27.

25. Foster HA, Yasouri FN, Daoud NN. Antibiotic activity of soil myxobacteria and its ecological implications. FEMS Micro-biol Ecol. 1992;10:27-32.

26. Norén B, Raper K. Antibiotic activity of myxobacte-ria in relation to their bacteriolytic capacity. J Bacteriol. 1962;84:157-62.

27. Gebreyohannes G, Moges F, Sahile S, Raja N. Isolation and characterization of potential antibiotic producing actino-mycetes from water and sediments of Lake Tana, Ethiopia. Asian Pac J Trop Biomed. 2013;3:426-35.

28. Weissman KJ, Müller R. Myxobacterial secondary metab-olites: bioactivities and modes-of-action. Nat Prod Rep. 2010;27:1276-95.

29. Arguelles-Arias A, Ongena M, Halimi B, Lara Y, Brans A, Joris B, Fickers P. Bacillus amyloliquefaciens GA1 as a source of potent antibiotics and other secondary metabolites for biocontrol of plant pathogens. Microb Cell Fact. 2009;8:63.

30. Zhang X, Yao Q, Cai Z, Xie X, Zhu H. Isolation and identifi-cation of myxobacteria from saline-alkaline soils in Xinjiang, China. PLoS One. 2013;8:e70466.

31. Lang E, Stackebrandt E. Emended descriptions of the genera Myxococcus and Corallococcus, typification of the species Myxococcus stipitatus and Myxococcus macrospo-rus and a proposal that they be represented by neotype strains. Request for an opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2009;59:2122-8.

32. Sood S, Awal RP, Wink J, Mohr KI, Rohde M, Stadler M, Kampfer P, Glaeser SP, Schumann P, Garcia R, Müller R. Aggregicoccus edonensis gen. nov., sp. nov., an unusually aggregating myxobacterium isolated from a soil sample. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2015;65:745-53.

33. Cortina NS, Krug D, Plaza A, Revermann O, Müller R. Myxoprincomide: A natural product from Myxococcus xan-thus discovered by comprehensive analysis of the secondary metabolome. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2011;51:811-6.

34. Gerth K, Jansen R, Reifenstahl G, Höfle G, Irschik H, Kunze B, Reichenbach H, Thierbach G. The myxalamids, new anti-biotics from Myxococcus xanthus (Myxobacterales) I. pro-duction, physico-chemical and biological properties, and mechanism of action. J Antibiot. 1983;36:1150-6.

35. Trowitzsch-Kienast W, Gerth K, Reichenbach H, Höfle G. Myxochromid A: Ein hochungesättigtes Lipopeptid-lacton aus Myxococcus virescens. Liebigs Ann Chem. 1993;1993:1233-7.

36. Gerth K, Irschik H, Reichenbach H, Trowitzsch W. The myxovirescins, a family of antibiotics from Myxococcus vire-scens (Myxobacterales). J Antibiot. 1982;35:1454-9.

37. Kunze B, Bedorf N, Kohl W, Höfle G, Reichenbach H. Myxo-chelin A, a new iron-chelating compound from Angiococcus disciformis (Myxobacterales). Production, isolation, physico-chemical and biological properties. J Antibiot. 1989;42:14-7.

38. Reichenbach H, Höfle G. Myxobacteria as producers of sec-ondary metabolites. In: Grabley S, Thiericke R, editors. Drug discovery from nature. Berlin: Springer; 1999. p. 149-79.

39. Irschik H, Trowitzsch-Kienast W, Gerth K, Höfle G, Reichenbach H. Saframycin Mx1, a new natural saframycin isolated from a myxobacterium. J Antibiot. 1988;41:993-8.

40. Kunze B, Reichenbach H, Augustiniak H, Höfle G. Isolation and identification of althiomycin from Cystobacter fuscus (Myxobacterales). J Antibiot. 1982;35:635-6

41. Schmitz A, Kehraus S, Schäberle TF, Neu E, Almeida C, Roth M, König GM. Corallorazines from the myxobacterium Cor-allococcus coralloides. J Nat Prod. 2014;77:159-63.

42. Jansen R, Höfle G, Irschik H, Reichenbach H. Antibiotika aus Gleitenden Bakterien, XXIV. Corallopyronin A, B und C − drei neue antibiotika aus Corallococcus coralloides Cc c127 (Myxobacterales). Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1985;4:822-36.